This week on the blog, a break in our normally scheduled content for a short post to try to explain some of the complexities of what is happening in Ukraine, particularly for those 'just tuning in' as it were.
One comment I'm seeing a lot of boils down to "but don't you know Ukraine has problems too?"
And yes. Ukraine has corruption problems, it's civil institutions aren't perfect.
But does a country have to be perfect in order to deserve to live in peace?
What Ukraine isn't: it isn't a Nazi state, like Putin says. It isn't doing a genocide, like Putin says. It isn't threatening Russia, like Putin says.
And for me that's what matters. All of the rest are real problems but in this context...it's just whataboutism.
We can all commit to supporting anti-corruption measures in Ukraine...right after we make sure Ukraine is still a self-governing democracy rather than a Russian satrapy ruled by some corrupt oligarch crony of Putin.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Twitter! Remember, for all those watching Ukraine, that the fog of war here is thick and the war in Ukraine is only in its early phases. Both triumphalism and despair are premature.
Also remember both Ukraine and Russia are going to be doing information ops here. 1/20
Both amplifying true information and also untrue information for the morale and public opinion effects. That's part of war: you trumpet your successes (or even make a few up) because you need to maintain morale.
Be wary of 'feel good' stories. 2/20
Twitter in some ways reminds me of Thucydides' description of armies on the shore at the naval battle in the Harbor of Syracuse (Thuc. 7.71), "Meanwhile, the 2 armies on the shore, while victory hung in the balance, were a prey to the most agonizing&conflicting emotions..." 3/20
A few points: 1) Putin's objectives, as he stated them tonight, reveal all of the diplomatic lead up to have been lies - he aims to overthrow the elected govt. of Ukraine. 2) Given that, it is not clear to me that any reasonable NATO action could have averted this.
3) This was Putin's choice. He has chosen war because he thinks he can gain by it. I suspect he is wrong in the long term, but very likely to prevail on the field in the short term. 4) I wish I had confidence that the sanctions to come would be as severe as I want.
5) Putin is waging a naked war of aggression. The people defending him are defending a naked war of aggression. The people and businesses who associate with those quislings are also making that choice.
They should be judged by the friends they keep; there is now no excuse.
So ever since Russia lawlessly invaded Ukraine (again), there's been a lot of very stupid whataboutism floating around this platform.
One of those dumb lines is "Why is separatism in XYZ ok, but Donetsk and Luhansk are illegitimate?"
This line is stupid, let's discuss why. 1/11
What this relies on is that most people are guided by moral intuition in this, and so not prepared to offer a logical response - they feel it - so the questioner (who also doesn't have an answer) gets to score a point, despite being very dumb.
But there is a logical answer! 2/11
The questioner is advancing along the lines of 'national self-determination.' But - as the UN Kenya ambassador put it so well - that's road that ends in a river of blood. Europe DID bleed itself into ethno-states and it very bad. 3/11
Yes, I see your sneer-quotes around "keep the peace" or "peacekeepers," but you need to be clear and explicit about the brazen lies.
An invading army of aggression is not 'peacekeeping.'
Russia has spent the last few days manufacturing transparently false 'provocations' to provide the pretext to invade Ukraine under the false guise of 'defending' two illegitimate breakaway republics that were never under threat.
Do not assume your readers know that! Most people are not paying close attention - but they may be about to.
So you have to state these facts *every*single*time.* Seriously, get a ready-to-go hyperlinked paragraph to copy-paste into everything you write.
So for one, if Putin is going to own the libs by not invading Ukraine, wow, yes, I am totally owned. Pwned, even.
But seriously if Russia actually withdraws the troops from the border, that is a huge win for NATO and Biden should do a giant victory lap w/ other NATO leaders. 1/8
Figure it this way: assuming Russia is backing down, there are really two possibilities here.
Possibility one: Putin was bluffing. He moved forces to the border and made threatening noises (and then followed up with demands) in the hopes NATO would blink... 2/8
...or that the stress would divide NATO. It didn't work. Allies mostly handled it well - sure, some posturing from all of the majors (inc. USA) but no concessions, no fatal split.
If this was a bluff, Putin got called on it and folded. Embarrassing. 3/8
So thinking a bit about choice in historical video games..., we've got a fair bit of evidence that most players - like 90%+ - when given a choice play games as the 'good' character.
'Evil' gameplay choices thus mostly exist to give weight and consequence to the 'good' choices.
I think that puts a burden on developers to either 1) make it really clear why 'evil' options were chosen (@PdxInteractive is, I think, pretty good at this) or 2) not hide all of the historical cruelty behind 'evil' choices no one is going to take.
If your game has the player doing imperialism, you can't have the character of it depend on their choices, because most players are going to choose the 'good' option and thus you get a game that presents relatively benign imperialism, a thing which didn't really happen.